On One Hand

December 10, 2004

Cool Stuff

Filed under: Uncategorized — ononehand @ 10:56 pm

Why can’t we be more like Italy?





  1. I think the answer to your question is fairly complex. I think if more than 10% of the population was really interested in the workings of government and how it relates to their lives, we might have something similar. Italy might also also be more polarized, or 100 other answers, I’m not really familiar with their politics.

    Comment by lancerboi — December 11, 2004 @ 6:29 am | Reply

  2. Americans couldn’t pick one social issue to agree on, besides the daunting task of gathering in a crowd without breaking out in riot… you know, without the Chiefs fans calling the Bronco’s fans lame, or somebody shouting Dale Earnhardt Jr is gay.

    Comment by johnnya — December 11, 2004 @ 8:46 am | Reply

  3. We’re probably too lazy. Around this city you could probably get a gathering of 30 if you were lucky.

    Comment by iwishedforyou — December 11, 2004 @ 1:13 pm | Reply

  4. That’s government, as in administration/legislature, not the structure. They don’t have a revolution every 5 years.

    Comment by emeraldimp — December 11, 2004 @ 5:27 pm | Reply

  5. What?!?!? Have a backbone to stand up for what we believe in?!?!

    Thats CrAzY talk!

    I’m sure we would much rather focus our energy on buying new stuff and things! Stuff and things make the world go ’round, ya know.

    Comment by emotive_wisdom — December 12, 2004 @ 4:38 am | Reply

  6. Why Don’t We Be More Like America in the 1930’s?

    The majority finally tired of the rich’s stealing from everyone else. The current occupant of the White House combines the fine qualities of Warren Harding (bewildered), Calvin Coolidge (worshipping wealth), Herbert Hoover (living in the 19th century, and then throwing money at the rich to waste it), and Adolf Hitler (who never made a mistake).

    Comment by buddyoverstreet — December 12, 2004 @ 12:03 pm | Reply

    • Re: Why Don’t We Be More Like America in the 1930’s?

      Wow, that’s a pretty strong condemnation, lol.

      All the poor states won this election for Bush, so I think the President’s appeal is mainly a Populist one. I don’t think it’s sustainable, because people will start to catch on, or the Democrats will wise up. (As Aimee Mann says, it’s not going to stop until… ) I don’t think Bush is really as bad on a long-term scale as everyone suggests; it always seems worse when you’re living in a time than it does when you’re beyond it. Incidentally, I think if you asked most people who were alive in the 1930’s, it wasn’t such a good time to live in, even compared to now.

      Comment by ononehand — December 14, 2004 @ 12:03 am | Reply

  7. Proportional Represenatation

    Matt’s probably aware of the politics of the countries of his ancestry (not a good assumption of most Americans), so I’ll just add that the problem is proportional represenation. Seats in the legislature should be winner take all. Then the parties (three at most) can form stable coalitions. Proportional representation helped Adolf Hitler destroy the Weimar Republic, and France is still a legislative mess due to it, not to mention Israel’s constant problems with too many parties.

    Comment by buddyoverstreet — December 12, 2004 @ 12:12 pm | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: